Armed Forces Covenant in Action? Part 4: Service Personnel Education

We support the Armed Forces’ provision of challenging and constructive education and employment opportunities for young people. But we would welcome further information on why the Army is so dependent on recruiting personnel under the age of 18 years compared to the other two Services, and whether steps are being taken to reduce this dependency.

We welcome the expansion of apprenticeships for new recruits and trainees and the improvements in the ratings given by Ofsted. The Armed Forces should build on these improvements to ensure that more establishments providing apprenticeships are rated as outstanding by Ofsted. The MoD should provide us with its plans to address the areas for further improvement identified by Ofsted and its recommendations.

The MoD should carry out a thorough cost-benefit analysis of the policy of recruiting Armed Forces personnel under the age of 18 years old. It should provide us with this cost-benefit analysis.

If as the MoD states, it has to recruit personnel at whatever level of attainment is available, then it should boost remedial action when recruitment entry standards are particularly low. In the light of changes brought about by Future Force 2020, it may be that recruiting personnel with higher levels of attainment would better meet the future needs of the Armed Forces. The MoD should identify how it might raise the basic entry level and still recruit sufficient personnel.

The Armed Forces have a good record of improving the literacy and numeracy of recruits and trainees who enter the Armed Forces with low levels of attainment. We welcome the introduction of literacy and numeracy support throughout Phase 1 training. The MoD should consolidate this recent improvement by reviewing their support for literacy and numeracy to ensure that it meets best practice as set out by Ofsted.

Whilst we recognise that some recruits may not have done well in their previous academic careers and may not be eager to take further academic exams, the MoD should encourage more recruits to undertake English and Maths GCSEs which would stand them in good stead for future employment.

The MoD should ensure that all instructors complete the ‘Defence Train the Trainer’ course before they take up their appointments. The MoD should also institute a system of observation and feedback to all instructors in line with the recommendations made by Ofsted in its recent work for the MoD. In response to this Report, the MoD should set out its plan and timetable to implement these recommendations.

We support the use of Ofsted inspections, which bring an independent assessment of the performance of training and education within the Armed Forces, in particular, for recruits and trainees under the age of 18 years. The Armed Forces should share the results of the inspections across establishments to help them improve.

We welcome the continuing improvement in the Ofsted ratings of Armed Forces initial training establishments. The MoD should work to improve all establishments so that they reach the minimum acceptable Ofsted standard of ‘good’ in a timely fashion. In particular, the MoD should focus its attention on those weaker establishments whose performance has not improved. The MoD should tell us how it intends to achieve this improvement and in what timescale.

In response to this Report, the MoD should inform us of the results of its investigation into the fall in the take-up of Standard Learning Credits. If appropriate, the MoD should encourage greater take-up amongst Armed Forces personnel.

The MoD should not reduce funding for education as a result of the 2013 Spending Review. The MoD should promote education in the Armed Forces and encourage the chain of command to find time for personnel to engage in such activities.

We are persuaded that, as well as recruiting graduates as officers, the provision of higher education for those in command in the Armed Forces is essential and should not be reduced by the MoD as a cost-cutting exercise. The MoD should provide us with the results of the Review of the Higher Command and Staff Course when completed and the response of the Defence Training Board to its recommendations. The Armed Forces Covenant in Action? Part 4: Education of Service Personnel 7 We will return to the subject of higher education in the Armed Forces, in particular, the need to educate personnel in strategic decision-making, as part of our work on Future Force 2020.

With the increased role envisaged for reservists in Future Force 2020, it is essential that the Armed Forces make Reserve Service as attractive as possible for the reservists and their employers. We see the education accreditation project as an important component in encouraging people to join the Reserves. The MoD should provide us with the results of this project and its implementation plans.

Given that most Armed Forces personnel will need to have at least one further career, we support the MoD’s policy of supporting the provision of civilian qualifications. We recommend that the MoD identify the potential for more pilot projects with civilian employers to develop the provision of civilian qualifications and to ensure that vital skills paid for by the MoD are not lost to the country. The MoD should tell us the results of its pilot projects on the training of paramedics.

Most Armed Forces personnel do well in gaining employment after leaving the Services. Many employers find ex-Armed Forces personnel very employable. In particular, employers value their disciplined approach, determination and work ethic. We encourage the MoD to continue its support for the resettlement of Armed Forces personnel, particularly in this time of redundancies from the Armed Forces.

We recognise that training personnel to deliver operational capability is paramount for the Armed Forces. However, we believe that the Armed Forces also provide challenging and constructive education and employment opportunities for young people. We welcome the expansion of apprenticeships for those joining the Service. Ofsted reports that performance in most training establishments is good. But we would wish to see an improvement so that all establishments are rated at least good and more establishments, apprenticeships schemes and courses are rated as outstanding.

Continuing education for serving personnel is important, both for their own career development and for retention. As personnel will almost certainly go on to a further career after they leave the Services, it is also important that training leads to civilian qualifications wherever possible. We welcome work by the Armed Forces to increase the number of areas where personnel can acquire a civilian qualification and would like to see this work further extended.

Training by the RAF had a full inspection in January 2009. It was also found to be good.27 Key strengths and areas for improvement for the Royal Navy are shown in Table 5 below. The next full inspections will be within six years of the last inspection but may be brought forward if performance drops and an Ofsted risk assessment indicates the need for an earlier visit.28 Table 5: Key findings of the 2009 Ofsted inspection of RAF apprenticeships Key strengths  Very high overall success rates on most programmes  Good development of learners’ practical skills  Very good resources to enhance and develop learning on most programmes  Particularly good welfare and vocational support for learners  Good strategic planning, co-ordination and performance management of the apprenticeship programmes Key areas for improvement:  Insufficient planning of reaching and learning for learners’ varying skills and needs  Insufficient progression opportunities for all learners  Ineffective strategic co-ordination and quality management of self-assessment Source: Ofsted29

We welcome the expansion of apprenticeships for new recruits and trainees and the improvements in the ratings given by Ofsted. The Armed Forces should build on these improvements to ensure that more establishments providing apprenticeships are rated as outstanding by Ofsted. The MoD should provide us with its plans to address the areas for further improvement identified by Ofsted and its recommendations. 26 Ofsted Report http://www.ofsted.gov.uk/inspection-reports/find-inspection-report/provider/ELS/58403 27Ofsted report on http://www.ofsted.gov.uk/inspection-reports/find-inspection-report/provider/ELS/54191 28 Ev 31 29 Ofsted report on http://www.ofsted.gov.uk/inspection-reports/find-inspection-report/provider/ELS/54191 16 The Armed Forces Covenant in Action? Part 4: Education of Service Personnel Cost-effectiveness of recruiting 16 and 17 year old recruits

Given the increased demands on the MoD to provide education for recruits under 18 years of age, we asked the MoD if it was still value for money to recruit Service personnel younger than 18 years old. The Minister replied: [...] We are not concerned about it because we believe it is the right thing to do. Under-18s, who for instance join the Army, sometimes do cost a bit more to train initially, but they usually stay longer in the service—in some cases quite a bit longer—so we believe that the higher investment is worth it.30

Admiral Williams, Assistant Chief of Defence Staff (Personnel and Training), said they had not done a full cost-benefit analysis of recruiting those under the age of 18 years. He also added that he was uncertain what these recruits would be doing if they were not taking an apprenticeship with the Armed Forces.31

Child Soldiers International estimated that the MoD would save between £81 million and £94 million a year if it stopped recruiting personnel under 18 years of age.32 The MoD acknowledged that initial Army training for those under 18 years of age (junior entrant) costs more than that for standard entrant recruits but said that if recruitment of under 18 year olds was to be stopped, a shortfall of nearly 30 per cent of recruits would need to be made up.33 Admiral Williams said that it was unclear whether the Armed Forces would be able to recruit enough people if they stopped recruiting people under 18 years of age.34

The MoD also told us that those who joined under the age of 18 years stayed in the Armed Forces longer. Of those Army personnel leaving in 2009–10, 2010–11 and 2011–12, the average length of Service for those who joined at less than 18 years of age was some ten years, and, for those over 18 years, the average length was some seven years.35 The MoD told us that there was also some evidence that these younger recruits also achieved higher ranks that those who joined over the age of 18.36

The MoD should carry out a thorough cost-benefit analysis of the policy of recruiting Armed Forces personnel under the age of 18 years old. It should provide us with this cost-benefit analysis. Basic level entry requirements

The Royal Navy, Army and the RAF determine separately the minimum educational qualifications required from recruits. Entry level requirements also vary with the nature of the role to be undertaken by the recruit ranging from no educational qualifications to a full professional qualification such as a Registered Nurse. The minimum entry requirement is 30 Q 49 31 Q 49 32 Child Soldiers International : One Step Forward http://www.child-soldiers.org/research_report_reader.php?id=650 33 Ev 24 34 Q 52 35 Ev 26 36 Ev 24 The Armed Forces Covenant in Action? Part 4: Education of Service Personnel 17 ‘entry level 2’ which equates to the standard expected from a seven to eight year old in literacy and numeracy. The MoD does not keep data on the educational achievements of its recruits on entry to the Armed Forces.37 But of those recruited in 2012, all in the Royal Navy or RAF were above entry level 2 for literacy or numeracy. Only 3.5 per cent of the Army were rated at entry level 2 for literacy, however, 39 per cent had a literacy level of an eleven year old. On numeracy, 1.7 per cent were at entry level 2 and 38 per cent of an eleven year old.38

We asked the MoD if it had considered raising the basic entry level standard. Colonel Johnstone, Assistant Head, Training, Education, Skills, Recruitment and Resettlement, said that the issue had often been looked at but they recruited in competition with other employers and took the best available candidates. She further said that: An individual who comes to be selected is put through a number of assessments, [including] literacy and numeracy [...]. We also measure their attitude, their physical fitness, their commitment to joining the Army, Navy or Air Force, and their trainability. We take the best that we can to fill the numbers that we need, so the actual levels of achievement will go up and down depending on who is coming to us from the marketplace.39

If as the MoD states, it has to recruit personnel at whatever level of attainment is available, then it should boost remedial action when recruitment entry standards are particularly low. In the light of changes brought about by Future Force 2020, it may be that recruiting personnel with higher levels of attainment would better meet the future needs of the Armed Forces. The MoD should identify how it might raise the basic entry level and still recruit sufficient personnel. Literacy and numeracy support

Given the entry levels of some of the recruits and trainees in the Armed Forces, considerable effort is needed to improve their literacy and numeracy levels. The MoD assesses that recruits need to reach entry level 3 (standard of an eleven year old) to assimilate training fully and all recruits have to reach this standard before the second phase of training.40

In 2008, the MoD and the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills (BIS) commissioned the National Institute of Adult Continuing Education (NIACE) and the National Research and Development Centre for Adult Literacy and Numeracy to conduct a longitudinal study of basic skills in the Armed Forces. The study was conducted over three years and followed a sample of recruits from each of the three Services. It involved interviewing the recruits, their line managers and senior officers, trainers and education staff. The study also assessed some 1,600 Army recruits with low literacy and numeracy skills during their first two and a half years of training and service. The results of the study 37 Ev 14 38 Ev 17-18 39 Q 5 40 Ev 24 18 The Armed Forces Covenant in Action? Part 4: Education of Service Personnel were, on the whole, very positive. It showed conclusive evidence of the importance of literacy and numeracy skills for professional development and operational effectiveness.41 It also reported that: The strong Service ethos generates high expectations of success amongst learners and their line managers alike, which combined with the strong culture of training and development to prepare for immediate job roles and promotion, contribute to a most impact on learner outcomes.42

The study also made a number of recommendations as to how support for the improvement of literacy and numeracy in recruits could be enhanced; how awareness of its importance could be raised; and on the need for better management information on the performance of individual learners for them and for the Services and Defence.

Ofsted told us that support for recruits and trainees with additional learning needs was mixed in 2011–12, and showed no clear improvement from the previous year. However, those recruits and trainees with specific learning disabilities, such as dyslexia, were managed more effectively.43 It also told us: An initial assessment of a recruit’s literacy and numeracy needs often takes place at the initial stages of application. At this stage, literacy and numeracy support is well managed. The process of passing on information from initial assessment, through phase 1 and phase 2, including the role of subcontractors, was poorly managed in too many cases, with the result that the quality of literacy and numeracy support did not always meet the needs of the recruit.44

We asked the MoD what it had done to address an Ofsted recommendation that literacy and numeracy support should be provided from the beginning of recruits’ training programmes. Colonel Johnstone said: [...] The previous training delivery model at the infantry training centre at Catterick was that when the recruits completed their training, they got a package of literacy at the end of their training. With the introduction of functional skills, [...] it is now peppered through the course, and the literacy and numeracy is delivered in context. That helps. The policy is that all our trainees will be at entry level 3 before they start phase 2 training.45

Both Ofsted and the longitudinal study supported the MoD in the adoption of a functional skills approach to the teaching of literacy and numeracy: that is, integrating the teaching of these skills throughout the first phase of military and trade training rather than as separate modules. This approach reinforces the importance of learning in context and 41 The Armed Forces Basic Skills Longitudinal Study, 7 June 2012 http://www.niace.org.uk/current-work/armed-forces- basic-skills-longitudinal-study 42 Ibid 43 Ev 32 44 Ibid 45 Q 2 The Armed Forces Covenant in Action? Part 4: Education of Service Personnel 19 the development of transferable skills. It was introduced over the period April 2011 and March 2013.46

In its evidence, Ofsted identified characteristics of effective literacy and numeracy support that the best of providers shared and that, it believed, would benefit the education of new recruits. When asked if the Armed Forces had assessed its literacy and numeracy support against these characteristics, Colonel Johnstone detailed where they met best practice more generally.47

The Armed Forces have a good record of improving the literacy and numeracy of recruits and trainees who enter the Armed Forces with low levels of attainment. We welcome the introduction of literacy and numeracy support throughout Phase 1 training. The MoD should consolidate this recent improvement by reviewing their support for literacy and numeracy to ensure that it meets best practice as set out by Ofsted.

We asked the MoD if it should be doing more to encourage recruits to do English and Maths GCSEs as part of their basic training. Admiral Williams, Assistant Chief of Defence Staff (Personnel and Training) replied: Many of those people who do not hit the GCSE bar are perhaps those who do not fit with our national education system. [...] Most of those who have come through the state system and have not got a GCSE may need a different approach. [...] Some of those individuals who just don’t seem to get the standard state provision or the standard academic approach are able to develop their numeracy and literacy skills when taught and trained in a slightly different way. [...] In the Army in particular, we have a substantial number of people who haven’t gained the traction in the standard state system and haven’t developed a wish or an obvious ability to make the GCSE standard. Our approach is to take those functional standards and try to work it a different way.48 He further replied that individuals had the opportunity to take the exams if they wished: [...] right the way through all the Armed Services there are opportunities to take your education across. I would not say it was a very high number—I am not sure whether we gather the statistics—but the opportunity is there, whether you are on a deployed ship or whether you are in Afghanistan, depending on the operational situation. [...] In a ship I deployed with, I think we had 10 people out of 200 who got an English GCSE in a six-month deployment. So the opportunities are there.49

Whilst we recognise that some recruits may not have done well in their previous academic careers and may not be eager to take further academic exams, the MoD should encourage more recruits to undertake English and Maths GCSEs which would stand them in good stead for future employment. 46 Ev 23 47 Q 17 48 Q 18 49 Q 19 20 The Armed Forces Covenant in Action? Part 4: Education of Service Personnel Defence instructors

Instructors are required to attend a ‘Defence Train the Trainer’ course which involves some mentoring from a senior teacher.50 We heard on our visit to two training establishments that some instructors did not attend the course before commencing their work as instructors. In its recent report, Ofsted said that: Inspectors recognise that instructors at all establishments are knowledgeable, highly skilled an well qualified, but, as was the case in previous years, too few instructors arrive at their postings having completed the Defence Train the Trainer course. In half of the phase 1 establishments and in over half of the phase 2 establishments, fewer than half of all instructors begin their new roles having completed the training.51

Ofsted told us that instructors play a vital role in ensuring that recruits’ and trainees’ personal and educational needs are met effectively and that a well-planned professional development programme for these key personnel is important in sustaining improvement.52 The Ofsted inspection of Army apprenticeships shown in Table 3 also pointed to some instructors lacking experience and qualifications. It further said: Most of the establishments inspected last year did not have an effective system for improving the quality of training through structured instructor observations to help them improve.53 Ofsted also commented that this remained an area for improvement in its 2013 report.54

We asked the MoD witnesses if they agreed with Ofsted’s assessment. Colonel Johnstone replied: I think they were right, and they put this in their annual report on what they had seen in armed forces education last year. It had also been picked up possibly because the Army was considering developing this new approach to instructors as something that our own internal inspections and audit had shown as an area for improvement, so we had asked Ofsted to do an additional piece of work for us that they did between January and April, which was to come and look specifically at the development of instructors after their initial defence training course, and they have come back to us with some proposals on how we can improve it. [...]55

She added: the Army is rolling out something over the next 12 months or so called the Army instructor capability. As well as the instructor qualification that people will have when they go in to teach in training establishments, there will be a higher level of 50 Q 21 51 http://www.ofsted.gov.uk/resources/welfare-and-duty-of-care-armed-forces-initial-training-2013 52 Ev 33 53 Ibid 54 http://www.ofsted.gov.uk/resources/welfare-and-duty-of-care-armed-forces-initial-training-2013 55 Q 22 The Armed Forces Covenant in Action? Part 4: Education of Service Personnel 21 qualification, the Army instructor supervisor, and one of their specific roles will be to monitor and improve classroom level instruction. Above that, I think that it is going to be the Army instruction leader, who will be managing the whole instructor output and linking those instructor performance standards to the delivery of the quality education.56

The MoD should ensure that all instructors complete the ‘Defence Train the Trainer’ course before they take up their appointments. The MoD should also institute a system of observation and feedback to all instructors in line with the recommendations made by Ofsted in its recent work for the MoD. In response to this Report, the MoD should set out its plan and timetable to implement these recommendations. Oversight of education

Ofsted undertakes two types of inspection on MoD education and training. First, it inspects the provision of apprenticeship training and funded education by each of the three Services. This work is funded by the Skills Funding Agency.57 Establishments by Ofsted judged to be ‘good’ or ‘outstanding’ are inspected again within six years. Those establishments judged to be ‘satisfactory’ or ‘requiring improvement’ are re-inspected within 12–18 months.58

Secondly, the MoD commissions and pays Ofsted to inspect the welfare and duty of care of Armed Forces initial training establishments. These inspections cover outcomes for recruits as well as the quality of teaching and learning but are separate from Ofsted’s regular inspections of BIS-funded education and training delivered within the MoD.59 Ofsted inspects at least ten establishments each year.60

Ofsted reported that [...] Evidence from the care and welfare [inspections] indicates that, overall, leadership and management is efficient but establishments need to make better use of data to support self-assessment and help them to improve. [...] Good practice, as evidenced through inspection, is not shared routinely across establishments to help others improve.61

Ofsted told us that the Director General of Army Recruiting and Training had provided clear strategic direction and leadership to enhance the awareness of the Army’s apprenticeship programme and that this had resulted in a greater understanding of the importance of apprenticeships to soldiers’ development. Ofsted further told us: 56 Q 21 57 Ev 31 58 Ibid 59 Ev 25 60 Ibid 61 Ev 34 22 The Armed Forces Covenant in Action? Part 4: Education of Service Personnel The Army’s capacity to make and sustain improvements is good. The A&SDs [Arms and Service Directors] make good use of data to monitor provision. The analysis of data is shared very effectively across the Army to prompt action. In the infantry, A&SDs have introduced competitive performance tables which are very effective in stimulating commanding officers’ commitment to the programme and their understanding of its benefits.62

We support the use of Ofsted inspections, which bring an independent assessment of the performance of training and education within the Armed Forces, in particular, for recruits and trainees under the age of 18 years. The Armed Forces should share the results of the inspections across establishments to help them improve. Results of Ofsted inspections Inspections of establishments

The results of the Ofsted inspection of care and welfare of Armed Forces initial training establishments are given in Table 6 below. Eight out of the 21 establishments inspected were rated satisfactory (now categorised as ‘requires improvement’ by Ofsted). 62 Ibid 32 lennosreP ecivreS fo noitacudE :4 traP ?noitcA ni tnanevoC secroF demrA ehT stnemhsilbatse gniniart ecnefeD fo ssenevitceffe llarevo eht rof sgnidarg detsfO :6 elbaT 31–2102 2102–1102 1102–0102 seniraM layoR ertneC gniniarT odnammoC hgielaR SMH natluS SMH gnidnatstuO gniW gniniarT odnammoC – )MRCTC( egelloC FAR ,tinU gniniarT riA dna reciffO gniW dnammoC – MRCTC llewnarC egelloC noitadnuoF ymrA nordauqS gniniarT tiurceR ,notlaH FAR ,tnemigeR gniniarT sproC deruomrA layoR enruobgnissaB ,tnemigeR gniniarT ymrA dooG ertneC ytiruceS dna ecnegilletnI ecnefeD notgnivoB retsehcniW ,tnemigeR gniniarT ymrA loohcS enirambuS lavaN layoR ,hgielaR SMH yrettaB )hsirI( 42 ,yrellitrA layoR tnemigeR ht41 thgirbriP ,ertneC gniniarT ymrA noitacifilauQ enirambuS ,edylC esaB lavaN MH sproC riA ymrA ,tnemigeR )gniniarT( 2 gnidrauG dna gniciloP fo egelloC ecnefeD esruoC yratiliM fo loohcS layoR ,tgeR EMSR 3 lennosreP dna scitsigoL fo egelloC ecnefeD gnireenignE nwoD yhtroW ,noitartsinimdA notgninnoH FAR kcirettaC ,ertneC gniniarT yrtnafnI drofsoC FAR truhdnaS ,ymedacA yratiliM layoR kcirettaC ,ertneC gniniarT yrtnafnI kcirettaC ,ertneC gniniarT yrtnafnI ,yrotcafsitaS ,skcarraB layoR ssecnirP ,tnemigeR gniniarT 52 ertneC gniniarT secivreS lacideM ecnefeD sproC citsigoL layoR ,tnemigeR gniniarT 52 ro etauqedA tucpeeD tsruhdnaS ymedacA yratiliM layoR seriuqer notlaH FAR tnemevorpmi notgninnoH FAR drofdnalB ,tnemigeR slangiS 11 liN liN liN yrotcafsitasnU 46gniniarT laitinI secroF demrA ni eraC fo ytuD dna erafleW troper 3102 detsfO dna3621-1102 dna 11-0102 rof ecnefeD fo yrtsiniM :ecruoS 82 vE 36 3102-gniniart-laitini-secrof-demra-erac-fo-ytud-dna-eraflew/secruoser/ku.vog.detsfo.www//:ptth 46 24 The Armed Forces Covenant in Action? Part 4: Education of service personnel

Ofsted told us that inspection was having a positive impact on establishments previously judged to be satisfactory or inadequate. However, one Army establishment was judged only to be satisfactory for the fourth time. Ofsted told us that, “in weaker establishments, the same problems remain: high wastage rates, inconsistencies in the quality of care and a failure to ensure that the recruits have sufficient basic skills to complete their training successfully”.65

Ofsted further told us: HMCI [Her Majesty’s Chief Inspector of Schools] is of the view that more needs to be done for young people and adults joining the Armed Forces training establishments. The establishments prepare and support young people to meet the challenges and demands of their role and to enter the Armed Forces as highly professional, highly skilled and well-motivated individuals. All establishments therefore must be at least good and that this must be viewed as the minimum acceptable standard.66

We asked the Minister how long it would be before all establishments were judged good or outstanding. He replied: I do not think that we can pre-empt that [publication of the Ofsted report for 2012– 13], but I think that you will find that the gradings in the report that will come out in the summer will be better than those we had last year.67 In its 2013, Ofsted reported that out of the eleven establishments inspected in 2012–13, three were rated as outstanding and six as good and two as only adequate (requiring improvement). 68

We welcome the continuing improvement in the Ofsted ratings of Armed Forces initial training establishments. The MoD should work to improve all establishments so that they reach the minimum acceptable Ofsted standard of ‘good’ in a timely fashion. In particular, the MoD should focus its attention on those weaker establishments whose performance has not improved. The MoD should tell us how it intends to achieve this improvement and in what timescale. 65 Ev 32 66 Ev 33 67 Q 55 68 http://www.ofsted.gov.uk/resources/welfare-and-duty-of-care-armed-forces-initial-training-2013 The Armed Forces Covenant in Action? Part 4: Education of service personnel 25 3 Continuing education of Armed Forces personnel Description of the education support schemes

The Minister told us that the MoD supports elective learning.69 The MoD also told us that it supports education throughout personnel’s careers which had benefits for the personal development of such individuals and for retention.70 The MoD’s description of the various education support schemes available to serving personnel and those leaving the Services is set out in Table 7 below. Table 7: Description of the education support schemes The Standard Learning Credit (SLC) scheme, which supplies financial support, throughout the Service person’s career, for multiple, small scale learning activities, is designed to enhance educational or vocational achievement. Under the SLC scheme personnel may claim 80 per cent of course fees, up to a maximum of £175 per financial year, paid to civilian bodies for certain personal development courses, examinations and support. Complementing the SLC scheme, there is the Enhanced Learning Credit scheme (ELC) providing help to personnel who qualify with a single payment, in each of a maximum of three separate financial years, offering to pay 80 per cent of the fees up to a maximum £1k or £2k (depending on qualifying scheme membership of either 4 or 8 years’ service) to help pay towards the cost of higher- level learning. The ELC scheme helps to motivate full time members of the Armed Forces to pursue their higher level personal development, both during their Service and for up to ten years afterwards, subject to the qualifying criteria being met. An Individual Resettlement Training Costs (IRTC) grant is payable to Service Leavers (SL) with more than 6 years service to help towards the cost of resettlement training. A full refund for fees paid (up to a maximum of £534) may be claimed. IRTC may be claimed at any time in the last two years of service but normally in the last 9 months. The Further Education/Higher Education Support Scheme provides eligible SL who have four years full-time service with fully subsidised tuition fees for a first full Level 3 or a first HE qualification, including foundation or full undergraduate degrees. SL must be registered for the ELC scheme. MOD pays a contribution per claim if any unused ELC credits remain, with BIS or the devolved administrations contributing the balance of the course fees. Source: Ministry of Defence 71 Learning Credits

Standard Learning Credits (SLCs) provides very limited financial support of up to £175 a year for a maximum of 80 per cent of any course fees. The MoD explained to us that it was often used to extend a military course. Colonel Johnstone said: [...] What we do in the Services, which is a little bit different—I think it is an advantage—is that we try to get as much educational benefit from the training that they are doing in service anyway, through the accreditation scheme and so on. We 69 Q 46 70 Ev 14 71 Ev 24-25 26 The Armed Forces Covenant in Action? Part 4: Education of service personnel then encourage the individual to do the additional learning that might be needed. We actively say to people, “You have done 80 per cent of this qualification through the military course you have just completed. If you now want to get the full qualification, it will take this many credits at university, and here is the military funding system that will give you a refund towards it.”[...]72

Take up of SLCs has fallen since 2009–10, see Table 8 below. Annual expenditure on SLCs has also fallen from £2.8 million in 2009–10 to £1.6 million in 2010–11. In 2011–12, expenditure was some £1.9 million.73 Table 8: Take-up of Standard Learning Credits Service No of Claims Expenditure Totals Authorised £ million Royal Navy 2,265 0.329 20,012 claims 2007–08 Army 13,167 1.251 £2.267m RAF 4,580 0.687 RN 1,755 0.250 17,964 claims 2008–09 Army 13,533 1.737 £2.388m RAF 2,676 0.401 RN 1,807 0.256 18,579 claims 2009–10 Army 14,663 2.241 £2.841m RAF 2,155 0.344 RN 2,276 0.314 121,010 claims 2010–11 Army 6,447 0.862 £1.607m RAF 3,178 0.488 RN 2,729 0.366 14,049 claims 2011–12 Army 7,793 1.069 £1.945m RAF 3,527 0.510 Source: Ministry of Defence74

We asked the MoD why the take-up of SLAs had fallen, Admiral Williams said: We have also noticed that and we are looking into why that might be. The initial feedback—it is not fully worked through; this is initial responses from the training commands—is that it might be as a result of the higher profile of the apprenticeship scheme and the fact that all of those coming in feel that they are on a course or getting qualifications and moving along a line that they can recognise. That might be why we are not feeling the need to focus on and take the opportunities of the SLCs. That is possible. Operational commitments might be part of it. That drop would largely seem to be in the junior ranks. [...]75 Colonel Johnstone added that completions of apprenticeships had increased from around 7,000 in 2007–08 to 12,000 in 2010–11.76 72 Q 58 73 Ev 22 74 Ev 22, table 7 75 Q 26 76 Q 27 The Armed Forces Covenant in Action? Part 4: Education of service personnel 27

In response to this Report, the MoD should inform us of the results of its investigation into the fall in the take-up of Standard Learning Credits. If appropriate, the MoD should encourage greater take-up amongst Armed Forces personnel.

Enhanced Learning Credits (ELCs) were developed to motivate full time members of the Armed Forces to pursue higher level personal development during their service and for up to ten years afterwards. Take-up of ELCs has significantly increased recently, see Table 9 below. Correspondingly, expenditure on ELCs has risen from £5.7 million in 2007–08 to £21.5 million in 2011–12.77 Table 9: Take-up of Enhanced Learning Credits Service No of No of Claims Expenditure Totals Registrations Authorised £ million RN 2,987 1,255 1.112 13,881 2007–08 Army 9,124 3,316 2.978 registrations, RAF 1,770 1,932 1.595 6,503 claims £5.687m RN 3,721 1,677 2.258 16,048 2008–09 Army 9,374 3,882 4.980 registrations, RAF 2,953 2,295 2.845 7,854claims £10.083m RN 4,127 1,663 2.324 18,262 2009–10 Army 11,633 3,825 5.158 registrations, RAF 2,502 1,988 2.497 7,476 claims £9.978m RN 2,715 2,115 3.006 13,550 2010–11 Army 8,913 5,347 7.631 registrations, RAF 1,922 2,927 4.014 10,389 claims £14.651m RN 3,006 2,970 4.467 19,254 2011–12 Army 14,286 7,630 11.284 registrations, RAF 1,962 3,328 5.709 14,468 claims £21.461m Source: Ministry of Defence78

We asked the MoD how information about ELCs is communicated to personnel. Admiral Williams replied: They are widely advertised internally; in every unit that you visit, you should see posters. Equally, it is on the intranet, and that is where we would find increasing numbers, of our new people, particularly, looking for the information. Those who are interested in pushing ahead for an enhanced learning credit or getting accreditation for higher level education would look there, and every unit has people with education responsibilities if they are not big enough to have an education specialist officer. Part of the roles and responsibilities of that individual is to proselytise such things.79 77 Ev 22 78 Ev 22-23, table 8 79 Q 25 28 The Armed Forces Covenant in Action? Part 4: Education of service personnel Funding and the time available for education

We asked the MoD if learning credits and apprenticeships might be squeezed in the next round of spending reductions. Admiral Williams replied: That is a really difficult question. Every last bit of the armed forces is subject to scrutiny of where we are at the moment in terms of funding, and we in the education area will not be immune to any of that. That is counterpoised by the very clear advantage we get by the investment we make in our people. That is recognised very well and very clearly. It is recognised today and it is recognised in our new employment model, which we are developing at the moment. One aspect of that is to ensure that we get parts of that that have some of these credits embedded within them. In terms of policy and where we are in our thinking, the educational side is absolutely front and centre, and crucial, but I could not sit here today and say that it is in any way protected.80

The time available for education is often limited because of work pressures and operational deployments and this is likely to have been exacerbated by recent Armed Forces redundancies. We asked the Minister if personnel had enough time to participate in education. He replied: I believe we encourage them to do so wherever it is practical. Again, I make the point that ultimately we are training personnel to be able to conduct operations in defence of the realm. But we do encourage people to study where they can and we do our best to try to advance all of our people as far as practical bounds allow. I am sure that people will always want to have more time in some contexts, but we have a fairly good crack at it.81 Colonel Johnstone also said that personnel could study when deployed: It is a matter of mixing all that together in a blend, so that the individual, regardless of whether they are in a training establishment, a workplace or are deployed in Afghanistan or anywhere else, is able to access that support for literacy and numeracy, including electronic learning and so on.82 The MoD also provided some information on the numbers of personnel taking qualifications on board Royal Navy ships and in deployed locations. In 2012–13, some 3,000 Army and Navy personnel had taken civilian examinations in Afghanistan or on board ship.83

The MoD should not reduce funding for education as a result of the 2013 Spending Review. The MoD should promote education in the Armed Forces and encourage the chain of command to find time for personnel to engage in such activities. 80 Q 28 81 Q 57 82 Q 17 83 Ev 28, table 5 The Armed Forces Covenant in Action? Part 4: Education of service personnel 29 Higher education as part of career development for senior leaders

We asked the MoD whether higher education was seen as a core part of career development in Future Force 2020. Admiral Williams replied: A lot of thought is going into higher education at the moment—where it sits and whether you need formally to stratify a rise within an officers career development programme, starting with a bachelor degree and moving through a masters. It is certainly true to say today that the Services offer foundation degrees for the basic officer training. There are other foundation degrees offered for warrant officer aircrew, [...]. So there is a foundation degree with a route to full honours, funded and paid for, for those who wish to take it.84 He said that there is a debate within the Armed Forces about the possibility of an all-graduate entry for officers. He further said: [...] we are a little bit nervous about going quite that far, for worry that you would miss one or two people who are just not academically focused but who are very good potential officers. So there is a lot of debate at the moment. If you look at the through-career development of officers—if you look at the advanced command and staff course, for example, where a masters degree is on offer, or the Royal College of Defence studies, where similarly one is able to take such a qualification—the opportunities are certainly there, and each Service has its own focus.85

The Minister told us that education was important in producing senior officers and, in particular, in the development of strategic thinking. He added: There have been studies undertaken into the intellectual support needed in the Armed Forces, and into how higher levels of training and education help us to develop people and our competitive edge, both operationally and in other areas. Clearly the ability to train our senior leaders in the right way and to the right standard is as important to the Armed Forces as to any other organisation. But of course there is the additional element of military and strategic training on top of that.86

The MoD has undertaken limited research comparing qualification levels to the success of senior officers. Admiral Williams said: I am not sure that the research or work that we have done stands up in the way of academic rigour, but certainly all three Services have looked quite carefully at their top cohort and looked at where they have come from. [...] and we have had very many very successful senior officers—actually, very clever, academically gifted senior officers—who did not necessarily have a degree when they entered the Service. There is an issue there for me in a broader educational sense, because I would give you a personal view that I think that some people are ready at the age of 18 to take a degree, 84 Q 29 85 Ibid 86 Q 61 30 The Armed Forces Covenant in Action? Part 4: Education of service personnel but some people are not and they get traction later on. The delight for me in the Services is that there is an opportunity. It is not easy, because you are doing a proper job at the same time, and to give yourself the time and to drive yourself hard enough to ensure that you give your academic studies enough focus is a difficult thing to do, but the opportunities are there.87

Admiral Williams also said that the MoD evaluated education in the Armed Forces regularly: There has been a more or less constant evaluation and re-evaluation of the educational input that we give our individuals, our officers and our senior officers. The Advanced Command and Staff Course, which takes place in the middle of an officer’s career, is structured so that an MA is possible—and indeed recommended— on it. We are looking at the characteristics of that course and whether it delivers sufficiently the level of strategic studies required. It does contain a considerable proportion of strategic studies, and we continue to look at it. Only a month ago, the Defence Training Board commissioned me to do another review of our Higher Command and Staff Course, the relationship between that and the Royal College of Defence Studies, and that which we give our individuals on both those counts. [...] So this is a much reviewed, focused area of our capability. I do not think we would ever sit back and be complacent and say that we have got it right. [...] 88

We asked whether the review of the Higher Command and Staff Course had been commissioned by the Defence Training Board with a view to cutting expenditure. Admiral Williams replied: It is capability-focused. It is about using the current resources as well and as consistently as we can between something like the Higher Command and Staff Course, which is an operationally focused course, and the Royal College of Defence Studies, which is much more of a strategic piece. It is designed to make sure we get the optimal output out of all those things.89

The MoD provided us with the terms of reference for the Review and told us that the Defence Training Board would consider the resulting report in October 2013.90

We are persuaded that, as well as recruiting graduates as officers, the provision of higher education for those in command in the Armed Forces is essential and should not be reduced by the MoD as a cost-cutting exercise. The MoD should provide us with the results of the Review of the Higher Command and Staff Course when completed and the response of the Defence Training Board to its recommendations. We will return to the subject of higher education in the Armed Forces, in particular, the need to educate personnel in strategic decision-making, as part of our work on Future Force 2020. 87 Q 34 88 Q 61 89 Q 62 90 Ev 30 The Armed Forces Covenant in Action? Part 4: Education of service personnel 31

Given the increased role for reservists in Future Force 2020, we asked the MoD what it was doing to get work in the Reserve Forces accredited for civilian degree courses as happens in Australia. Admiral Williams replied: We are looking at every bit of accreditation as part of the whole FR20 [Future Reserve 2020] piece. There is a massive amount of work going on there, as you might imagine, and some of it will follow on the initial work on how we are going to make the thing work. But the aim is, absolutely, to align regular and reserve; the aim is to ensure that in every bit of training that we do in the Ministry of Defence, we look for accreditation where we can. That aligns not only with FR20, but in this new employment model, which sort of had its genesis in the regulars [...].91 The MoD provided us with the terms of reference for the above accreditation project. The results of the project are due to be considered by the Future Reserves 2020 Programme Board in October 2013.92

With the increased role envisaged for reservists in Future Force 2020, it is essential that the Armed Forces make Reserve Service as attractive as possible for the reservists and their employers. We see the education accreditation project as an important component in encouraging people to join the Reserves. The MoD should provide us with the results of this project and its implementation plans. 91 Q 33 92 Ev 29 32 The Armed Forces Covenant in Action? Part 4: Education of service personnel 4 The impact of education on the resettlement of Armed Forces personnel

Members of the Armed Forces will nearly always need to pursue a further career after they leave the Armed Forces. Many aspects of a career in the Armed Forces can help Service leavers obtain civilian employment. In particular, education and qualifications gained in the Armed Forces play an important role in future prospects. Armed Forces personnel undertake many qualifications during their time in the Armed Forces, see Table 10 below. Table 10: Qualifications (excluding apprenticeships) gained by Armed Forces personnel as a result of their Service training Type of Qualification Academic year 2009–10 2010–11 2011–12 Stand alone NVQ and other Level 2 13,282 17,204 11.195 Stand alone NVQ and other Level 3 6,813 8,105 7,592 Stand alone NVQ and other Level 4 2,670 2,519 2,249 HND, Foundation Degrees and other level 5 4,774 5,113 3,582 Honours Degrees and other level 6 543 779 915 Postgraduate Degrees/Diplomas and Higher 596 218 1,578 Degrees Total 26,275 33,938 27,111 Source: Ministry of Defence93 The provision of civilian qualifications

We asked if the MoD was doing enough to enable Service personnel to gain a civilian qualification related to their military job. Admiral Williams replied: I think, throughout the Service [...] that we fight for and spend the money to accredit that which we do in a military sense, and for a civilian. So flying a fast jet aeroplane, for example—funding the civilian pilot’s licence, which seemed at one stage to me to be rather counter-intuitive. You might imagine all the pilots would immediately leave, but actually what it meant was that they felt that they were being invested in and did not feel that there was green grass over the other side that they really wanted to focus on. And it helped retention. So that is the sort of thing—there is a good business reason for doing a lot of this.94 Admiral Williams also said that the MoD tried to get civilian accreditation for most of what they did and that they would spend up to an additional 10 per cent on a military training course to ensure that it led to civilian accreditation. The Minister added that if Armed Forces personnel had done 80 per cent of a civilian qualification as part of their 93 Ev 18, table 5c 94 Q 45 The Armed Forces Covenant in Action? Part 4: Education of service personnel 33 military training then there were resources to enable them to get the civilian qualification.95

We asked the Minister if there were areas where it is not possible to get a civilian qualification, citing naval medics as a possible example. He replied: [...] We had a meeting yesterday where this was on the agenda. Part of the issue is that being a paramedic in the national health service is effectively a degree level qualification now. People coming out of the Armed Forces who have very good medical qualifications and who may have served in theatre, do not necessarily have a degree, but would be extremely useful in the back of an ambulance. We are therefore looking at ways to try to provide some form of conversion to allow ex-medics to convert to work, for instance, as paramedics in the ambulance service. Some pilot programmes are under way actually at the moment, with a couple of ambulance trusts. We are looking to learn lessons from that to see how we could roll it out.96 The MoD further told us that there were three pilot projects looking at paramedic qualifications in place or being considered. These projects included:  scoping a new course for new trainees to close the gap between basic military medic training and what is required to work in civilian ambulances;  professional recognition for existing military medics working with Cumbria University and Yorkshire Ambulance Trust; and  a possible further project working with West Midlands and East England Ambulance Trust.97

Given that most Armed Forces personnel will need to have at least one further career, we support the MoD’s policy of supporting the provision of civilian qualifications. We recommend that the MoD identify the potential for more pilot projects with civilian employers to develop the provision of civilian qualifications and to ensure that vital skills paid for by the MoD are not lost to the country. The MoD should tell us the results of its pilot projects on the training of paramedics. Resettlement prospects

We put to the MoD that people who join the Armed Forces are not going to remain in Service until they are 65 years old and will need to go on to a civilian working life. Admiral Williams agreed and further said: [...] We spend money and we take time and help individuals get accredited, get the kind of qualifications they want to get. There is money available to get civilian qualifications, if you want to go and do something completely different.98 95 Q 65 96 Q 64 97 Ev 25-26 98 Q 45 34 The Armed Forces Covenant in Action? Part 4: Education of service personnel

Armed Forces personnel are entitled to resettlement advice and support when leaving the Services. The support is designed to help personnel leaving the Armed Forces make a successful transition to civilian employment in a suitable further career, which is appropriate to their skills, knowledge, experience and aspirations. The level of support is graduated based on the length of service in the Armed Forces although all those who are medically discharged are entitled to the full resettlement service. For example, those who have served more than six years receive individual career support such as CV writing, interview skill, training and a grant towards other training plus time to attend training. The support is provided by the Career Transition Partnership (CTP) which comprises the MoD and recruitment specialists, Right Management.99

The number of personnel leaving the Armed Forces who have used CTP support has increased from some 9,900 in 2009–10 to 14,900 in 2011–12.100 Current figures show that between 93 per cent and 95 per cent of leavers receiving CTP resettlement support obtain employment within six months of discharge.101

We asked if the skills of Armed Forces personnel were readily transferable to civilian employment. Admiral Williams replied: [...] if I look at the engagement we have done very recently as part of the FR20 [Future Reserve 2020] work and the Green Paper, those employers who we have managed to engage with appear to venerate and understand those skills that the military brings to their offices. British Telecom, for example, cannot have enough ex- military in its ranks of technicians. [...] If I look at the career transition partnership, we seem to score above 90 per cent in Service people getting a job. That seems to me to be proof that, as long as we work on translating those military skills and trying to put them in words that people will understand, they are there. Of course, we take civilian qualifications wherever we can.102 The Minister said that the education received by Service personnel helped them in returning to civilian life. He further said: [...] We do not do a GCSE in character formally, but I believe that we help to engender character in the Armed Forces in a way that is attractive to employers.103 He added that former Armed Forces personnel did well in employment: If you have served for six years or more, when you leave the forces you get a support package called the Career Transition Partnership—the CTP—and the statistics on this are quite impressive. If you leave the forces, you are looking for work and you have been through the CTP programme, 90 per cent of those people get a job within 99 https://www.gov.uk/information-for-service-leavers 100 Ev 23 101 http://www.defencemanagement.com/article.asp?id=180&content_name=Human%20Resources&article=4506 102 Q 39 103 Q 66 The Armed Forces Covenant in Action? Part 4: Education of service personnel 35 six months, and 95 per cent of those people get a job within 12 months. We know that because we do tracking surveys that follow their progress.104

Most Armed Forces personnel do well in gaining employment after leaving the Services. Many employers find ex-Armed Forces personnel very employable. In particular, employers value their disciplined approach, determination and work ethic. We encourage the MoD to continue its support for the resettlement of Armed Forces personnel, particularly in this time of redundancies from the Armed Forces. 104 Q 66 36 The Armed Forces Covenant in Action? Part 4: Education of service personnel Conclusion

We recognise that training personnel to deliver operational capability is paramount for the Armed Forces. However, we believe that the Armed Forces also provide challenging and constructive education and employment opportunities for young people. We welcome the expansion of apprenticeships for those joining the Service. Ofsted reports that performance in most training establishments is good. But we would wish to see an improvement so that all establishments are rated at least good and more establishments, apprenticeships schemes and courses are rated as outstanding.

Continuing education for serving personnel is important, both for their own career development and for retention. As personnel will almost certainly go on to a further career after they leave the Services, it is also important that training leads to civilian qualifications wherever possible. We welcome work by the Armed Forces to increase the number of areas where personnel can acquire a civilian qualification and would like to see this work further extended. The Armed Forces Covenant in Action? Part 4: Education of service personnel 37